Now i or my wife can back our 440 into any spot using the twin controls and thruster by touchpad or Joystick, i did it all myself and it cost under $500:00AU. Works a treat!

A mooringrope tied to the cleat beside the helm is very easy to flick onto a dock cleat, in Europe you back into your pen, very rarely you come alongside, i usually favour angling the port quarter in first, secure and power away slightly bringing the head to Stb.

I think if people think 'out of the square' a little by spending less time criticising and more time innovating then the boats offered on today's market might be more usable.

I did the above mod with 'Teleflex' cables, it becomes a lot easier if you use electronic/fly by wire.

It ain't rocket science.

Cheers

This looks like a good solution. How viable is a remote that would control both throttles and thruster via a WiFi connected, hand held device. I would go farther and include the rudder as well. I have seen some products advertized that seem to do some of this but never the whole nine yards.

I love the new 52! i think the flybridge looks great and very functional. I don't usually sit much when I'm trimming or manoeuvring the boat anyways as i'm short and need to stand in order to see. So the back rest wont be an issue for me. As for the decision to locate the mast further to aft is for speed and performance advantages they learned from racing. It says in the brochure

" Centring the mast in this way creates a large forward triangle (a promise for great performance), whilst affording all the simplicity of a self-tacking jib.
The large forward triangle also means it is possible to use a respectably-sized Code 0 for light wind conditions.
A VMG option allows to divide headsail surface areas with a moveable self-tacking staysail and an overlapping genoa.
The shorter boom makes the mainsail much easier to manoeuvre.
The mainsail, which is relatively narrower and higher, benefits from better winds at the top, thus enhancing performance: extending the sail centre really improves performance,
The forestay and shrouds are at much wider angles to the mast, thereby substantially reducing compression: this choice allows to reduce sample weight, thus increasing stability and speed.
By re-centring the weight in this way, pitching is considerably reduced.

I can see the logic..... can't wait to test it out for my self!! i think lagoon hit this one out of the park!

I agree

These new 39 and 52 look more like Fountaine Pajot and more elegant If they really gain speed like at least a couple of knots they will be winners

I have an unformal info that the L 52 delivered to boat show">Miami boat show didn't quite do well. They didi the passage from Canaries to Caribbean (I don't know exactly where but it should rather be Goudalaoupe or Martinique) in 3 weeks..The factory manager and experience skippers on board with routing support form France and for this size of boat, it's not impressive..
As I said, I still tend to believe that this rigging could have some issues. Has anybody seen yet any review/test or even a picture/video clip under sail ?Isn't it strange so many months after the launch that there is nothing around ?
I need this size of cat, but I want to see the FP as well to be announced shortly. I guess it will be an enlarged version of Helia which I liked a lot.

As a novice, the average speed of 7.5 knots over 5,000 nm seems pretty respectable.

I was thinking that there are two obvious performance advantages to moving the mast aft.

First, a problem with all mainsails is they sit downwind of a round spoiler more commonly called the 'mast.' Certainly that puts the mainsail in turbulent air. When the oncoming air is turbulent even before it reaches the sail, it is guaranteed that the sail will be in a thick, turbulent boundary layer resulting in more drag and less lift. In contrast, the leading edge (luff) of the foresail is typically very thin, producing less turbulence, allowing for thinner, less turbulent boundary layer, greater lift and less drag.

Second, a high aspect ratio sail has many advantages. It has less induced drag caused by 1.) vortex shedding at the top and bottom, and 2.) less turbulent boundary layer thickening because of its shorter chord.

Additionally a high aspect ratio sail has to have a taller mast to keep sail area constant. This means that taller sail is in a faster average wind that a shorter sail. Once again a boundary layer effect, this time caused by the sea surfaces boundary layer.

I have always been relcutant to make these assertions because these are all based on airplane design principles. The relative wind that a sailboat experiences is much weaker than even the slowest airplane. I just don't know how the aerodynamics of 60 knots scales down to 10 knots.

It was gratifying to see that the arguments put forward by lagoon in the embedded link are almost the same as the ones that I have been pondering for some time.

Doug, next time you go for a sail get a heap of 'tell-tails' and place in lines of 5 at say 4-6 different heights on the mainsail. Go to windward and trim both headsail and mainsail maintaining the best 'slot-effect'.

This will answer many of your questions.

Cheers

__________________
"Political correctness is a creeping sickness that knows no boundaries"

Doug, next time you go for a sail get a heap of 'tell-tails' and place in lines of 5 at say 4-6 different heights on the mainsail. Go to windward and trim both headsail and mainsail maintaining the best 'slot-effect'.

This will answer many of your questions.

Cheers

Frank,

I have always wanted to do that. If I get a chance, I certainly will.

I have seen photos of airplane wings that have had the same treatment and it quickly becomes obvious why wings have at most 20% of their chord in the flaps. This has made me wonder why sail boats don't have enormous foresails and relatively small mainsails.

An unbelievable amount of research has gone into the design of Fowler flaps. This kind of flap slides backward and down to open up a slot between the bottom of the wing and the top of the flap. (It seems that aeronautical engineers learned about slots from naval architects.) The results are the same for every airplane from a singleengine Cessna to an Airbus 380: there is no overlap between the wing and the flap. In fact, in the plan view there is a substantial gap between the wing and flap. This probably explains why a 150% genoa will not go to windward as well as a 100% or a 110% genoa.

This is a long way to say that I doubt that the self tacking foresail on both the 52 and the 39 presents a sacrifice in performance. It also reinforces my belief that moving the mast aft is a trend that we are likely to see continued even more in future Lagoons.

I know that theorizing is fun but there is no substitute to testing. Considering Lagoon and VPLP's track record. I suspect that this has been tested thoroughly.

Generally speaking, all of the boat reviews are positive to please their main advertisers. Have you noticed the banner of the crusing compass ? Beneteau group who manufactures Lagoon..
I am not sure which one exactly but on november 2013 isue of one international magazine, there was a detailed review of both L52 and L39.
Three things that I remember;
-39 sails much better than 52,
-the windage is so much in L 52 that they did 6 + knots in 22 kts of wind in running with bare poles !!!
-average speed was 9-9,5 kts in true wind of 20-22 kts in best AWA and about 8-8,5 in close hauled.

Shouldn't we expect a bit more than that for this size of catamaran and this innovative rigging ??
L 440 that I had tries long ago was almost as fast, if not faster..

I've had the chance to step on board the 52 a few weeks ago. I didn't sail, but for interior accomodations, here're my two cents :

1. The compression post takes a lot of room in the center of the saloon. Not because of it's dimensions but because of it's position. There's no way to watch TV as you can on the 560 (hung behind the kitchen counter) since the post is on the way, not that easy to grab during rough passages as a regular fiddle or handle and worst of all, because of it's position, you loose valuable real estate that can be better utilized with an additional couch or cupboard.

2. The concept of the rigging might be innovative, but you can't expect the same results that you get from a race boat on a cruising boat like this. Yes, the genoa is bigger (in percentage) compared to the mainsail. However, due to the height of the saloon roof, it has to loose quite some square footage at the bottom. Plus since this is a lagoon, the boom is high, therefore the same thing applies to the main as well. As Yeloya says, windage is the main factor to keep this big boy sailing, not it's sail area!

3. Lagoon is somehow really unflexible with the cabin layouts as well. I've asked if it's possible to order one with an owner's cabin at one hull and three cabins on the second one and they've rejected the idea stating that they'll not have enough room for one of the freezers. They do not accomodate the idea to put that freezer in the owner's cabin as well. So you either get stuck up with a three cabin boat -which you can get from the 450 in a better way and price- or you get a four cabin with none of the cabins really an owner's cabin.

4. I don't know if this transparent shower section in front of the bed works for everyone. Let alone the fact that not everybody will have a partner that they'll want to watch taking shower each and every time, the idea of hot steam and moisture hung in the middle of the cabin is quite nerving. That also means you can't take shower right before you go to bed (or right after for that matter of fact) since you'll have to try to sleep in an environment similar to the rain forest after that.

5. A secondary aft entrance to the owner's cabin would be great, like the one on 560.

Things to complain are quite a lot. But for myself, the reason behind all is simple. If you want a 3 or 4 cabin easy to handle cat, the 450 is a way better alternate than the 52 since that 7 feet does not effect the cabin space as much as it effects the general characteristics and handling of the boat. And if you're willing to go for the "floating condo" experience, the 560 is a much better alternate than the 52. Just my humble opinion of course...